What most people, even those who understand the data, don’t properly ken is the difference in the production delivery between conventional power units and wind. The former provides its whole power (its rated capacity) at a steady rate, unless asked to change its rate by grid controllers. Wind provides energy in fits and starts, always staggering its way around the grid, never controllable–in the process always entangled with supportive prosthetics to make its production appear whole and steady.

This is the kind of phenomenon that should also be part of the performance record from the Energy Information Administration. But it’s not. Such a mask allows people to therefore assume that the energy yield from wind is the same as that from conventional sources. But this is nonsense. Glenn Schleede has always characterized wind energy as low in value. This drives the wind suits crazy, for they want people to think that a kWh from wind is the same as the kWh from coal or nuclear. Balderdash! Is the performance of a drunken ambulance driver the same value as that of a sober ambulance driver?

Finally, tell Mr. Hall I would be happy to meet him in debate on the issue. We would address wind’s volatility as it affects integration techniques. And we would answer the following questions:

* Why did the Dutch stop using windmills to grind grain and pump water to reclaim land from the sea–as soon as the steam engine was invented?

* Why are sailing vessels used almost entirely for recreation today, rather than for commercial purposes?

* What is the difference between energy and power? What would be the likely consequence if all our gas pumps were wind “powered?”

* What is the percentage of oil used for electricity, nationally and in the MidAtlantic region?

* Why must electricity supply be matched to demand at all times?

* What are the implications for wind technology given that any power generated is a function of the cube of the wind speed along a narrow range of wind velocities (a wind turbine doesn’t begin work until wind speeds hit 9-mph and maxes out when the wind speeds hit around 34-mph)? Explain how a fluctuating source of energy could, by itself, “power” any city.

* Why has steady, controllable, precision power been the basis of modern life?

* If constructed on a forested ridge, how many acres of woods must be cut to support a 100MW wind project, consisting of 40-2.5MW turbines, each 460-feet tall? Account for the requirement to accommodate the “free flow of the wind” for each turbine, staging areas for construction, access roads, substations, and transmission lines. Also account for the number of miles the wind project would extend downrange, assuming five turbines per mile. Finally, account for the amount of concrete necessary to provide a sturdy base for each turbine.

* Examine four wind projects in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, asking how many permanent jobs were produced, the amount of local taxes and revenues received, and what the promises of such were beforehand?

Austin Hall was asked by Jon Boone to join him in a debate over wind power issues. (For any of you who attended the Asheville Wind Forum, Dan Boone, Jon’s brother, challenged Dennis Scanlin of Appalachian State to a debate, also on the issues of wind power.)
Jon even made it easy for Austin by posting the questions ahead of time.

Austin P Hall responded to an email stating he declined the offer to debate Jon Boone.

I want to post the debate questions as they should all make us stop and think about saving our beautiful mountains from commercial wind plants and the Wind Industry and from Wind shills, like Austin P Hall and Appalachian Voices. Once our mountains are destroyed by wind turbines, we can not rebuild them.

If anyone from the wind industry tries to sell you the idea that wind power works, please ask them the following questions posed by Jon Boone.